Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook
Featured Feijóo Crímenes corrupción Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea María Jesús Montero

The Supreme Court dismisses as "confusing" and "contrary to the function of the Judicial Police" the order of the Interior to Pérez de los Cobos

The Supreme Court says that "government interference" is not admissible in a judicial investigation with "absolute reservation".

- 2 reads.

The Supreme Court dismisses as "confusing" and "contrary to the function of the Judicial Police" the order of the Interior to Pérez de los Cobos

The Supreme Court says that "government interference" is not admissible in a judicial investigation with "absolute reservation"

MADRID, 30 Mar. (EUROPA PRESS) -

The Supreme Court (TS) establishes in the sentence where it agrees with Colonel Diego Pérez de los Cobos, annulling his dismissal as head of the Madrid Civil Guard Command, that the order given to him by the Ministry of the Interior to report on investigations related to 8-M was "confused" and, in any case, "contrary to the function of the Judicial Police".

The Contentious-Administrative Chamber has indicated, "regarding the reason given by the administration to justify the dismissal", that it was "confusing", as well as "redundant, because if the appellant was expected to report, it is obvious that it was with 'with purposes of knowledge', that is, to know something that was unknown and that appeared in the press".

The magistrates add that it was also "contrary to the function of the Judicial Police, since what the higher bodies of the Ministry of the Interior were unaware of and what it is said that the appellant did not report, were the 'investigations and actions' of the UOPJ ( Judicial Police Operational Unit), which was expressly prohibited by the magistrate who directed the investigation".

The Third Chamber emphasizes that, "in this case, the UOPJ was under the orders of the magistrate who directed the investigation, without government interference being admissible, and even less if the magistrate had ordered absolute confidentiality and that only she was informed" .

"Therefore, if the express order of the magistrate of absolute confidentiality is added to the reservations inherent to any investigation (...), it is not possible to dismiss someone who was not part of that unit and pretext for it 'not reporting the development of investigations and actions of the Civil Guard in the operational framework and of the Judicial Police for information purposes'", he explains.